pcm wrote:The first unit is out here for 80% of the time because our 2nd unit is worthless. It's even more worthless without Staal, if that's possible. The best power plays in the league the past few years simply rolled 2 units. And rolled over the opposition.

First man off can always be subbed by Malkin or Crosby, so maybe you overlap a possesion with both of them on the ice. Keep Letang-NIskanen out there as long as possible. Sub in Despres-Martin for the last 20 seconds. Rotate which unit (Crosby or Malkin) goes on for the first minute so there's no competition.

This doesn't make any sense. You'd rather keep Letang and Niskanen on the ice as long as possible than keep Crosby and Malkin on the ice as long as possible. I understand the thought that splitting the two makes for two quality units, but who's to say there's even an opportunity for a line change? Then you've got one of the top two players in the world riding the pine.

One huge issue with the PP is Letang as the best qualified QB then there's a massive drop off after (Nisky is serviceable, Martin can carry the puck but can't shoot for toffee, then nothing unless Despres wins a spot).I'd keep Letang and Nisky on the ice as long as possible (irrespective of Sid/Geno) just to avoid seeing Martin! Whilst it seems like a waste not having one of the greatest on the ice, why put them in a position they aren't suited to (such as Geno on the left side)? Sid, Geno and Neal are all lefties so are far more dangerous on the right, but with no one-time threat from the other side of the ice it becomes easier to shut down. TK and Sutter are light years behind in terms of talent but could one time a shot from the left side and force the PK to be honest...

Well, it looks like Malkin will be on the right side, with Kunitz in front, Neal roving along blueline and down the left side, and Letang point. I'd like to see Crosby work a bit more from directly behind the net, funneling pucks to either wing and right up the middle, but I'm not sure things will evolve that way. Regardless, it appears Neal will be the guy who spends the most time on his off side, but to me, he seems like a capable enough shooter to capitalize on scoring chances regardless of the side of the ice he is on. Maybe I have overconfidence in Neal, but what I have seen from him is a versatile shooter who can and will do what is asked of him.

pcm wrote:The first unit is out here for 80% of the time because our 2nd unit is worthless. It's even more worthless without Staal, if that's possible. The best power plays in the league the past few years simply rolled 2 units. And rolled over the opposition.

First man off can always be subbed by Malkin or Crosby, so maybe you overlap a possesion with both of them on the ice. Keep Letang-NIskanen out there as long as possible. Sub in Despres-Martin for the last 20 seconds. Rotate which unit (Crosby or Malkin) goes on for the first minute so there's no competition.

This doesn't make any sense. You'd rather keep Letang and Niskanen on the ice as long as possible than keep Crosby and Malkin on the ice as long as possible. I understand the thought that splitting the two makes for two quality units, but who's to say there's even an opportunity for a line change? Then you've got one of the top two players in the world riding the pine.

One huge issue with the PP is Letang as the best qualified QB then there's a massive drop off after (Nisky is serviceable, Martin can carry the puck but can't shoot for toffee, then nothing unless Despres wins a spot).I'd keep Letang and Nisky on the ice as long as possible (irrespective of Sid/Geno) just to avoid seeing Martin! Whilst it seems like a waste not having one of the greatest on the ice, why put them in a position they aren't suited to (such as Geno on the left side)? Sid, Geno and Neal are all lefties so are far more dangerous on the right, but with no one-time threat from the other side of the ice it becomes easier to shut down. TK and Sutter are light years behind in terms of talent but could one time a shot from the left side and force the PK to be honest...

Well, it looks like Malkin will be on the right side, with Kunitz in front, Neal roving along blueline and down the left side, and Letang point. I'd like to see Crosby work a bit more from directly behind the net, funneling pucks to either wing and right up the middle, but I'm not sure things will evolve that way. Regardless, it appears Neal will be the guy who spends the most time on his off side, but to me, he seems like a capable enough shooter to capitalize on scoring chances regardless of the side of the ice he is on. Maybe I have overconfidence in Neal, but what I have seen from him is a versatile shooter who can and will do what is asked of him.

Neal at least has a shoot first mentality. They could use more of that philosophy on their PP with the remainder of the unit, along with some actual player movement once they are in the offensive zone during the man advantage.

pcm wrote:The first unit is out here for 80% of the time because our 2nd unit is worthless. It's even more worthless without Staal, if that's possible. The best power plays in the league the past few years simply rolled 2 units. And rolled over the opposition.

First man off can always be subbed by Malkin or Crosby, so maybe you overlap a possesion with both of them on the ice. Keep Letang-NIskanen out there as long as possible. Sub in Despres-Martin for the last 20 seconds. Rotate which unit (Crosby or Malkin) goes on for the first minute so there's no competition.

This doesn't make any sense. You'd rather keep Letang and Niskanen on the ice as long as possible than keep Crosby and Malkin on the ice as long as possible. I understand the thought that splitting the two makes for two quality units, but who's to say there's even an opportunity for a line change? Then you've got one of the top two players in the world riding the pine.

It's pretty simple actually. Letang is the team's best defensemen and PP quarterback. By far. You take him off the ice and the drop off from there is significant. Malkin and Crosby play the same position. You take one off the ice and the other comes in. It's all about maximizing your resources.

I'd much rather a constant 2 minutes of pressure than 1:15 of pressure followed by 45 seconds of chasing the puck out of our own end. A powerplay is crucial for momentum.

But you'll say that having Crosby and Malkin out there together increases our chances of scoring... which is the point of a powerplay. I'd disagree, for the exact same reason that we don't play Crosby and Malkin on the same line during even strength. One of them is going to be playing at less capacity when not in their normal position. If putting them on the ice together resulted in some magical unstoppable chemistry, then that'd be one thing, but history says otherwise. Malkin and Crosby together have never been a dominating force on the powerplay.

pcm wrote:The first unit is out here for 80% of the time because our 2nd unit is worthless. It's even more worthless without Staal, if that's possible. The best power plays in the league the past few years simply rolled 2 units. And rolled over the opposition.

First man off can always be subbed by Malkin or Crosby, so maybe you overlap a possesion with both of them on the ice. Keep Letang-NIskanen out there as long as possible. Sub in Despres-Martin for the last 20 seconds. Rotate which unit (Crosby or Malkin) goes on for the first minute so there's no competition.

This doesn't make any sense. You'd rather keep Letang and Niskanen on the ice as long as possible than keep Crosby and Malkin on the ice as long as possible. I understand the thought that splitting the two makes for two quality units, but who's to say there's even an opportunity for a line change? Then you've got one of the top two players in the world riding the pine.

It's pretty simple actually. Letang is the team's best defensemen and PP quarterback. By far. You take him off the ice and the drop off from there is significant. Malkin and Crosby play the same position. You take one off the ice and the other comes in. It's all about maximizing your resources.

I'd much rather a constant 2 minutes of pressure than 1:15 of pressure followed by 45 seconds of chasing the puck out of our own end. A powerplay is crucial for momentum.

But you'll say that having Crosby and Malkin out there together increases our chances of scoring... which is the point of a powerplay. I'd disagree, for the exact same reason that we don't play Crosby and Malkin on the same line during even strength. One of them is going to be playing at less capacity when not in their normal position. If putting them on the ice together resulted in some magical unstoppable chemistry, then that'd be one thing, but history says otherwise. Malkin and Crosby together have never been a dominating force on the powerplay.

I guess we just see things differently. I'm not willing to take one of the two best players off the ice for the majority of the power play. I want all hands on deck. If it doesn't work, it's not a player issue, it's a coaching issue. There's no reason these two can't be on the ice and be successful together.

pcm wrote:But you'll say that having Crosby and Malkin out there together increases our chances of scoring... which is the point of a powerplay. I'd disagree, for the exact same reason that we don't play Crosby and Malkin on the same line during even strength. One of them is going to be playing at less capacity when not in their normal position. If putting them on the ice together resulted in some magical unstoppable chemistry, then that'd be one thing, but history says otherwise.

history says that crosby and malkin consistently produce when put together at even strength. they're split up because of the ripple effect through the rest of the lineup - not because they don't work well together. this is why they're still put together at ES when we need offense.

pcm wrote:But you'll say that having Crosby and Malkin out there together increases our chances of scoring... which is the point of a powerplay. I'd disagree, for the exact same reason that we don't play Crosby and Malkin on the same line during even strength. One of them is going to be playing at less capacity when not in their normal position. If putting them on the ice together resulted in some magical unstoppable chemistry, then that'd be one thing, but history says otherwise.

history says that crosby and malkin consistently produce when put together at even strength. they're split up because of the ripple effect through the rest of the lineup - not because they don't work well together. this is why they're still put together at ES when we need offense.

I agree, at ES the problem with Crosby-Malkin is not lack of chemistry but the glaring absence of one on a subsequent line. However, the positional nature of the PP is far more problematic than ES and they both love the same spot, and are both used to 'running' the PP from that position.

We no longer have the luxury of Staal being the guy on the ice following a PP (though from Sutter's SH attempt in practice I'm not too concerned!)

This is a question for anyone that has gone to the open practice sessions, but I am curious to hear what you think of Beau and his chances of making the team. It looks like from the score sheet that he is one of the top players for the baby pens (some say most of his points are on the PP) and I think if nothing other than 2nd PP time he could be a help on the big club. I feel that 2 PP units with Geno and Sid split up is the way to go and adding Bennet to the pool of players would make for 2 pretty lethal PP units. Thoughts?

I spent a bit of time watching Robert Bortuzzo in the 1 on 1s again. I would really like to see him win a spot in the top 6. By all accounts, he was a top defenseman for Wilkes-Barre last year and has continued to be this year. He may not have much left to prove at that level. The parent club could use a big, strong defensive defenseman like him, especially if he can make the adjustment quickly and work his way on to the penalty kill. He skates well and is good positionally, but the main thing I notice when I watch him is his wingspan; he's very rangy. If you remember Kjell Samuelsson, you know what I mean.